On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 08:40:27 +0200, Timur Mehrvarz <timur.mehrvarz@web.de>
wrote:
>> So I agree it would be if all UAs followed the same model and I hope
>> they do so for the majority of the cases, but we shouldn't prevent UAs
>> from coming up with alternative (default) UIs if they so desire. I
>> guess a RFC 2119 SHOULD would cover that, but I'm not entirely sure.
>
> I would be fine, changing it to:
>
> 6.1
> "Child elements should be treated like bitmap images, and should, by
> default, not be focusable."
So this wording implies that bitmap images can be focusable, but SVG
images should not be focusable. That doesn't seem correct. I guess
something like the following might work, but it's unclear to me what would
be in the list:
SVG images should not be focusable unless they
contain one of the following:
* ...
* ...
>>> With this, authors can make use of bitmap images and non interactive
>>> SVG elements, purely for style purposes. Without bringing down the
>>> usability of their documents at the same time.
>>>
>>> Agents may, of course, provide an alternative rendering mode, in which
>>> also non interactive SVG elements become focusable. But this should
>>> then probably also include bitmap images. (Btw, this is meant by
>>> "child elements must be treated like bitmap images". Not sure if this
>>> answers your question.)
>>
>> The problem I have with "child elements must be treated like bitmap
>> images" is that it seems to assume some default treatment for bitmap
>> images that isn't really clear from the text.
>
> No, it should be read as "Whatever the default behavior is, for bitmap
> images, treat scalable child elements the same. Except, there are
> specific reasons to treat them differently."
I don't really get this text.
> Let's try to bring this to conclusion quickly. If you think the text
> needs other changes, then please provide alternative wording.
See above.
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>